Romney v. RomneyObamaCare

[calicoug]

Why don't you think a president Romney couldn't act to repeal obamacare? This is from his campaign website.

Those are two different things. Sure- there are things he can do via executive orders. "Repealing" Obamacare isn't one of them.

[calicoug]

First, I missed the major point about the city councilman's promise and that's, obviously, that he lacks any power to do it. But since Romney can at least send over legislation, he's a bit more empowered that a city councilman.

As for Romney's entire statement, it's unfortunately consistent with his vexing habit of being just a bit off on his presentation and wordsmithing. He or his speechwriters obviously liked the juxtaposition of comparing the court's last day with his first, but it was a poor one. He should have simply opened with his "I will act to..." I agree with you that the introductory clause was off.

Good post.

[calicoug]

I agree. How long before we start seeing the act portrayed as a mutli-gazillion dollar tax increase by Obama and his partners in the house and senate.

That's a decent political move. But it is a shame that the architects of that argument know full well it is misleading and false. Politics has so very little to do with facts these days.

[All-American]

I keep seeing Romney argue (including again today) that one of the very first things he will do as president is overturn the Affordable Care Act. Question: Does he actually believe he has the ability to do that? If yes, that's concerning. If no, why is he so clearly lying?

With a republican house and senate, one wonders how long it would take to get it done. When are they first in session?

[calicoug]

With a republican house and senate, one wonders how long it would take to get it done. When are they first in session?

With the filibuster... never.

They start the first week of January in Congress.

[TripletDaddy]

Romney is a Moran if he spends the first day at the white house thinking about this health care crap. On My first day at the white house, I am calling everyone I know, telling them how cool it is to live in the white house, I'm going to hang out on the lawn and wave to all the tourists and laugh at those nuclear war protestors that camp out in Lafayette park, probably request all sorts of my favorite foods from the white house chef, run up and down the halls and slide on the travertine, and then kick back in the oval office with some of my closest dude friends, order pizza, watch some lakers on the tube and spin around in my chair. End the night with some inaugural white house sex (I am farly confident that every new president bones his wife on their first night in the white house....is there a bigger turn on for woman than her husband finally becoming president?).

Anyhow, there is clearly zero time on my agenda to w.a.s.t.e. looking at some legislation that will take forever to unravel. Mitt is a goofball.

[Ma'ake]

Demonizing Obamacare will work well for getting out the Republican base.

Unless there is a seismic shift in the electorate, the pivotal battle boils down to Hispanics and single women in key states, both groups strongly supportive of Obama, where he'll to be able to use Romney's vow to repeal ACA against him. "He cares so much about womens rights that he wants to take away the healthcare rights we fought tooth and nail to pass, the Republicans own ideas".

For that matter, the success of Romneycare in Massachusetts and Mitt's war cry to overturn the nearly identical Obamacare could easily be portrayed as Mitt not really having any kind of real core, at all.

A chameleon whom nobody can really know. Uncomfortable in his own skin. On a wide variety of issues. Except the Swiss Bank account.

[SCcoug]

Those are two different things. Sure- there are things he can do via executive orders. "Repealing" Obamacare isn't one of them.

Good thing he only said he'd act to repeal it. There are all sorts of things he could do to act to repeal Obamacare even on day one. Would, for instance, reversing the HHS mandate be acting to repeal Obamacare?

With the filibuster... never.

They start the first week of January in Congress.

Reconciliation may be used to repeal the individual mandate part of ACA. My understanding is that requires only a majority vote and can not be fillibustered.

[calicoug]

Good thing he only said he'd act to repeal it. There are all sorts of things he could do to act to repeal Obamacare even on day one. Would, for instance, reversing the HHS mandate be acting to repeal Obamacare?

See above for an answer on "act."

Reconciliation may be used to repeal the individual mandate part of ACA. My understanding is that requires only a majority vote and can not be fillibustered.

It's hardly that simple. In order for reconciliation to be available, you have to calculate the cost associated with the repeal and then offset that cost with other costs, all as calculated by the CBO. Of course, the CBO thinks the mandate will save hundreds of billions over a 10 year period (which is the relevant timeframe for reconciliation). So... good luck with that.

And when that is done, you will still have the Affordable Care Act intact, other than the mandate which was used largely to fund the Affordable Care Act. I'll bet you an awful lot of money nobody who has a vote thinks it makes sense to keep the law in place while eliminating the funding for the law. Especially if Republicans are in charge of the budget at that point and have run on no deficits. In short, I'll stick with my comments above that the filibuster won't allow Romney/Obamacare to be shot down.

[Portland Ute]

]

For that matter, the success of Romneycare in Massachusetts and Mitt's war cry to overturn the nearly identical Obamacare could easily be portrayed as Mitt not really having any kind of real core, at all.

How many times will this state law vs. federal law strawman be trotted out by "you people"?

[calicoug]

How many times will this state law vs. federal law strawman be trotted out by "you people"?

It's really not that simple, though. Unfortunately for Romney, he is the one who argued his plan should be used as a national model. Not to mention that the mandate itself has been heartily endorsed in actual proposed federal legislation by virtually every Republican in Congress who has been there for more than 7 years and most prior Republican nominees since 1992.

[Pelado]

It's really not that simple, though. Unfortunately for Romney, he is the one who argued his plan should be used as a national model.

Not really. Good try, though.

[SeattleUte]

Romney is a Moran if he spends the first day at the white house thinking about this health care crap. On My first day at the white house, I am calling everyone I know, telling them how cool it is to live in the white house, I'm going to hang out on the lawn and wave to all the tourists and laugh at those nuclear war protestors that camp out in Lafayette park, probably request all sorts of my favorite foods from the white house chef, run up and down the halls and slide on the travertine, and then kick back in the oval office with some of my closest dude friends, order pizza, watch some lakers on the tube and spin around in my chair. End the night with some inaugural white house sex (I am farly confident that every new president bones his wife on their first night in the white house....is there a bigger turn on for woman than her husband finally becoming president?).

Anyhow, there is clearly zero time on my agenda to w.a.s.t.e. looking at some legislation that will take forever to unravel. Mitt is a goofball.

This is a funny post but the thought of some past presidents boning their wives is gross.

[Ma'ake]

How many times will this state law vs. federal law strawman be trotted out by "you people"?

As Romney has demonstrated amply, repeatedly (see topic of this thread), politicians aren't targeting their messages to scholars or the well-informed.

The SuperPACS don't worry so much about a fair & balanced approach to message; it doesn't even have much accuracy at all.

The candidates just have to worry about not alienating key groups, and generally painting the other guy as bad for the nation. Romney's message is that Obama is out of touch, doesn't know how the economy works, and is raising taxes (for no good reason) like a madman. He's essentially mute on immigration, gay marriage, fighting terrorism, etc. Those areas either have limited potential to make him look good, or could make him look really, really bad.

Obama's message is that Romney would be the "out-sourcing" president, has very little compassion for common people, feels entitled to pay a far lower tax rate than the rest of us, even has a Swiss Bank account and money in the Caymans. Etc.

I would expect the issue of Mitt owning stock in nations that did business in Iran may come out, at some point. We'll see.

[Moliere]

I would expect the issue of Mitt owning stock in nations that did business in Iran may come out, at some point. We'll see.

Now Mitt owns shares in actual countries??? Wow, how did he do that???